As for Obama, you can make up your own mind of how he spun it at his press conference. I think the implication he made was one of an end, despite the Administrations efforts to the contrary. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GnbRAy5wG9I

Ahh, I was more focused on the “we won” part, and that didn’t come up in the press conference. He just said that it’s over, and then went on about plans, intentions and hopes for the future. Which makes sense. Why would Obama have tried to pull off a boastful lie by claiming a win for something that his political competitors instigated? Even if they’re all on the same side it wouldn’t make sense.

As for the grammar, I’m still pretty sure that “withdrawal” is a noun and not a verb, and that it should either be “forced to withdraw the troops” or “forced to withdrawal of the troops” or just “forced to withdrawal”. But I suppose language is always changing, so if ten soldiers (“troopers”) can become “ten troops” I guess withdrawal and withdraw could be completely interchangeable. But for now I remain sceptical. 😉

Well, it wasn’t a direct quote, but I think he greatly downplayed the violence there. I mean, I think skipping over the fact that we basically obliterated the country and that after years of fighting in country, shooting people via soldiers or mercenaries, his actual solution was to stay. It was only because of the SOFA that we withdrew at all. Did he say we “won”, well no, but this wasn’t a block party he organized that went awry. Hundreds of thousands of people are dead, maimed, homeless and/or with shattered lives and the guy that started it all, George W. Bush, got a pass on his watch. It seems to me a gross, gross understatement to dust off your hands and imply that there’s been any progress since Obama became president EXCEPT that the troops are gone, which is the very thing he fought against.